41 replies to this topic

[Greyboots]

Sorry for the tone of this post but it looks like some people REALLY need a wake-up call. The 2 guys I quoted? Nothing personal. You were just convenient.

Victor Morson, on 12 December 2013 - 04:21 PM, said:

EDIT: PS, no endo? Really?

How many heatsinks would he have to take off to get endo? And you don't understand this? Really?

All-energy mechs very often run out of space long before they run out of weight. The heaviest energy weapon is 7 tons for starters, only 1 AC weighs less. And DHS soak up so many critical slots and are far better than singles that the same space spent Endo will almost never give you enough weight back to afford enough single heat sinks to compete.

I mean, come on... Get a handle on the facts... Did you really think energy weapon imbalance was all about range and DPS? Not even close.

Quizzical Coconut, on 13 December 2013 - 02:52 AM, said:

...Except it's not a projectile, has duration, trades the one thing high tonnage energy weapons have in their favor (range)...

Irrelevant. And the fact that you go on to prove it's even less like a laser than a PPC is kind of amusing.

Quote

No, the LPL is much more like 2 medium lasers.

LPL: 2.75 dps, 300 range
2 ML: 2.5 dps, 270 range.

So it has 10% more dps and 11.11% more range, a virtually equal heat/damage ratio; all for the paltry price of 7 tons.

You really don't understand weapon structure do you?

So, let's say the damage loss gradient is even (and I have no idea of it is).

At 300m, you're close to right.
At 405m? The 2 medium lasers are now worth 1 medium laser at double heat (1.25 DPS)
The LPL is now worth 1.8 ish DPS. Significantly more than 2 medium lasers.
At 541m? The LPL is now worth an infinite number of medium lasers.

Not to mention that it's not all about DPS. Consider shooting target that's visible for 4 seconds. 2 medium lasers will deal 10 damage in that time (each laser will fire once). A Large Pulse? Well, that's 2 x 10.5 = 21. Over twice the damage of the mediums. Wait, what? Firing cycle actually makes a difference too? HOW ON EARTH DID THAT HAPPEN?!?

And I also find it amusing that you pointed out the differences in PPCs to prove me wrong then went on to ignore those differences when comparing medium lasers. If it makes a difference to one it makes a difference to the other. This is the sort of gobbeldygook that's messing with progress.

And your math sucks. It's all for the petty price of 5 tons over the 2 mediums for the benefit of being able to put it in a single hardpoint.

Yeah, I see what you did there and find it hillarious. Yes, the LPL needs some love but rubbish like that is not the way to get it, I'll thank you to stop hindering the process.

Edited by Greyboots, 13 December 2013 - 03:58 PM.

[Quizzical Coconut]

...I'm sorry, but between the mistakes, lies, and questionable inferences in that last post, by all that is right in the world, I can't let it be the last word.

Before this roller coaster ride begins, I have 1 question for you; knowing what you do now, would you consider the LPL closer to "the smallest PPC" or "much more like 2 medium lasers"?

Greyboots, on 13 December 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

I mean, come on... Get a handle on the facts... Did you really think energy weapon imbalance was all about range and DPS?

No. Our conversation isn't about the imbalance of energy weapons.

Quizzical Coconut, on 13 December 2013 - 02:52 AM, said:

...Except it's not a projectile, has duration, trades the one thing high tonnage energy weapons have in their favor (range)...

Greyboots, on 13 December 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

Irrelevant. And the fact that you go on to prove it's even less like a laser than a PPC is kind of amusing.

Irrelevant, you say? Why? They are all facts (and as far as functionality, quite relevant. Also, while i'm still in parentheses, I'm proving that the LPL is close to 2 medium lasers, not that "it's even less like a laser than a PPC").

Greyboots, on 13 December 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

You really don't understand weapon structure do you?

So, let's say the damage loss gradient is even (and I have no idea of it is).

At 300m, you're close to right.
At 405m? The 2 medium lasers are now worth 1 medium laser at double heat (1.25 DPS)
The LPL is now worth 1.8 ish DPS. Significantly more than 2 medium lasers.
At 541m? The LPL is now worth an infinite number of medium lasers.

1. Weapon structure is a broad term. Chances are the answer is yes.
2. The damage loss is a linear decrease from effective range to max range.

I'll let this one go, since I didn't include max range in my comparison (It was a rough comparison). However, I did include the range difference (11.11% in favor of the large pulse) so obviously, and I figured the readers could infer this, the LPL maintains its greater damage to a longer range. (I'm back in parentheses because this next part isn't related to my critique of your critique of my post, but when the hell is a 30-60m distance going to be an obstacle? Really, my atlas doesn't even complain about closing that kind of range.)

Greyboots, on 13 December 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

Not to mention that it's not all about DPS. Consider shooting target that's visible for 4 seconds. 2 medium lasers will deal 10 damage in that time (each laser will fire once). A Large Pulse? Well, that's 2 x 10.5 = 21. Over twice the damage of the mediums.

1. LPL is 10.6 damage/beam.
2. given the 0.6s beam duration and 3.25s recharge period of the LPL, you'd do 13.25 damage in that 4 second window, if you started firing the moment the enemy presented themselves. I'd expect a human to get in 1 beam before the enemy got to cover.
3. 4 seconds is a completely arbitrary time period (that I'm sure you thought would make the LPL look good). What if the enemy was exposed for 6 seconds? well you'd get 2 volleys off with either the 2ML or LPL now wouldn't you, in which case the damage difference would be 20 vs 21.2.

Quote

Wait, what? Firing cycle actually makes a difference too? HOW ON EARTH DID THAT HAPPEN?!?

...you sure took the simplicity of my original post and misinterpreted it as a lack of understanding like a boss, now didn't you?

Greyboots, on 13 December 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

And I also find it amusing that you pointed out the differences in PPCs to prove me wrong then went on to ignore those differences when comparing medium lasers.

That sentence kinda confused me for a moment, but after reading it a few times it's a straight up lie. The 3 differences I denoted between the PPC and LPL were:

Quizzical Coconut, on 13 December 2013 - 02:52 AM, said:

it's not a projectile, has duration, trades the one thing high tonnage energy weapons have in their favor (range)

The first 2 qualities are shared between the ML and LPL, and while the ML could hardly be considered a high tonnage energy weapon, there is a range difference. That I noted in my original post. Saying I ignored it is wrong.

Greyboots, on 13 December 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

And your math sucks.

...That hurts.

Greyboots, on 13 December 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

It's all for the petty price of 5 tons over the 2 mediums for the benefit of being able to put it in a single hardpoint.

I know. You know. Bill knows. While (and forgive me for this) I never stated that you would need 2 energy hardpoints to mount 2 medium lasers, including such a detail would have been a damn crime the likes of which haven't been seen since the "Liebeck vs. McDonald's" case of 1994.

...And I resent the idea that a statement of factual stats between 2 weapon systems is somehow rubbish that will hinder the progression of the LPL (honestly of all the things that could be responsible for its current state it sure as **** isn't this) but I think I'll leave you with the same question I started with; knowing what you do now, would you consider the LPL closer to "the smallest PPC" or "much more like 2 medium lasers"?